Score: 0
(4/0/4)
Mendocino County Grand Jury
• 2008-2009
Final Report of the City of Ukiah/Ukiah Valley Sanitation District Joint Ad Hoc Committee*
Published: August 14, 2008
4 pages
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and recommendations have not been extracted yet.
The full report content may still be accessible via the PDF link above.
Agency Responses 7
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
▶
Board of Directors of the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District
May 21, 2009
•
10 pages
• 9 responses
•
Score: 0
(+2, 0, -2)
View Details ▾
9 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
the Center Board engage an appropriate non-profit management consultant for formal board training. (Finding 2)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 1, the District Board will direct the District Manager to reach out to City and County staff to seek a more structured means of information sharing as to land planning decisions. 4 Recommendation No. 5 The City Manager has indicated that the City staff will be formulating a five year Capital Improvement Program in the near future. It is anticipated that the District will have some input in its development. The 09/10 Budget will include City and District sewer rehabilitation projects which will be funded under Fund 614 and it is anticipated that the proposed projects will not exceed funding a...
F2
Redwood Coast Senior Center is governed by a board of directors currently composed of six (6) members. Three members constitute a quorum. The bylaws state that the board shall consist of a minimum of five and a maximum of nine members. The board is self-selecting. Candidates are nominated by the board and approved by a quorum of the board. The Board receives no formal training.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
f 2 Approved 4_21_09 GRAND JURY REPORT RESPONSE FORM PAGE TWO The following Recommendation(s) require further analysis, and attached as required, is an explanation and the scope and parameters of the planned analysis, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared, discussed and approved by the officer and/or director of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed: (This time frame shall not exceed six (6) months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury Report) 4 and 13 The following Recommendations will NOT be implemented because they are not warranted and/or are not dee...
R3
board minutes reflect all actions by the board, including those recommended for adoption by the executive committee, that any complaints or commendations be read into the minutes, and that all minutes be reviewed for corrections, approved and posted, in a timely manner, together with the agendas for upcoming meetings. (Findings 4-5, 10, 24, 26, 29, 58, 71 and 83)
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
r 3rd quarter joint meeting. Recommendation No. 12 The activities listed in the recommendation are the issues that would normally be discussed at the planned quarterly joint meetings as they arise. However, it is to be noted that City and District staff and the District Board and City Council must agree that the issues get agendized for discussion. Recommendation No. 17 As previously reported, the District Board and the City Council have agreed to conduct quarterly joint meetings to discuss issues affecting both agencies. It appears reasonable and prudent to discuss planning and budget review ...
F4
Minutes indicate that these bylaws were amended in September of 2008 to permit two members of the Executive Committee to transact business with the full authority of the board. The only restriction is that the Executive Committee is required to report to the full board on all actions taken. Ratification by the full board is not required.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Finding 4 The Finding states that the District negotiated with the City to provide various services one of which being the “Operation and maintenance of its (District) sewer collection system in accordance …”. This service is to include maintenance of the District’s trunk sewer. The agreement clearly states that the title, management and control of the sewer plant remains with the City and that the “City agrees to service and maintain the trunk lines”. The agreement does not specifically address title and control of the trunk sewer but because the District constructed and paid for the trunk se...
F26
The Center board provided the Grand Jury with copies of written complaints it received about the Center in 2006 and 2008. The departure of key staff members in each of those years appears to have prompted a flurry of complaints about leadership and management issues. Written complaints state that: • “The director is seldom seen.” • “Repeated requests for copies of bylaws or procedures have been refused.” • “Employees say they are afraid to speak up.” • “No criticism, no matter how constructive, ...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Finding 26 The Finding states that the “District has sought increasingly detailed information from the City.” The Finding does not state if the detailed information so requested is information the City should have in order to properly carry out its duties and obligations pursuant to the requirements of the 1995 Participation Agreement. The Board believes that the information it has has requested is information that that should be provided or available to it pursuant to the Agreement.
F27
City staff members have acknowledged past shortfalls in providing information to the District and are considering a new accounting system that might improve responsiveness. Some argue that the City is not sufficiently staffed to provide all the information that the District may desire and that more detailed accounting would not be cost-effective in terms of ratepayer benefits.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Finding 27 The Finding states in part that “Some argue that the City is not sufficiently staffed to provide all information that the District may desire and that more detailed accounting would not be cost effective in terms of ratepayer benefits”. The Board does not agree with this finding. The inability of City staff to track labor hours spent by crews and administration staff that are assigned to and shared by to two distinct Enterprise Funds (Water and Sewer) is a function of inadequate accounting software. The detailed accounting is necessary to determine the expenses that should be assign...
F31
Also in March 2009, the Executive Director provided Jurors with a copy of the August 2008 board minutes that were not included in response to the initial document request. These newly provided minutes indicate the board’s approval of the law school tuition payments that he had been receiving, ostensibly with executive committee approval, since 2007.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding 31 The Finding states in part that “This practice has been publicly criticized”. It is not clear if the District’s separate audit process has been criticized or if not having a separate audit has been criticized. The Board does not agree or disagree with this part of the Finding.
F32
Of the three board members who were interviewed in fall of 2008, one acknowledged that tuition was being paid. The other two, including the President and the Treasurer, stated that they had no knowledge that tuition was being paid. The fourth, a new board member interviewed in 2009, stated that he learned of the tuition when it was discussed “…at a recent board meeting.”
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Finding 32 The Finding states in part “the auditors reported that because the City did not allocate costs between the District and City, available data were inadequate to support an independent audit report for the District”. The Finding does not make reference to the unavailability of financial records that were the result of records destruction in accordance with the City’s Record Retention Policy.
F47
The District and City have not engaged in adequate joint long-range planning. They have been largely reactive in actions taken regarding major maintenance and capital improvements, new sewer services, project planning and annexations.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Finding 47 The Finding states “the District and City have not engaged in adequate joint long range planning. They have been largely reactive in actions taken regarding major maintenance and capital improvements, new sewer services, project planning and 2 annexation”. This Finding does not take into consideration the dependency the District had and still has on the City. Until the assignment of a County Deputy Executive Officer to assist the District Board and until the hiring of its District Manager, the District Board was totally dependent on City staff for long range planning. The District c...
▶
District Manager of the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District
May 21, 2009
•
10 pages
• 9 responses
•
Score: 0
(+2, 0, -2)
View Details ▾
9 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
the Center Board engage an appropriate non-profit management consultant for formal board training. (Finding 2)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
r 1, the District Manager will reach out to City and County staff to seek a more structured means of information sharing as to land planning decisions. Recommendation No. 5 The City Manager has indicated that the City staff will be formulating a five year Capital Improvement Program in the near future. It is anticipated that the District will have some 4 input in its development. The 09/10 Budget will include City and District sewer rehabilitation projects which will be funded under Fund 614 and it is anticipated that the proposed projects will not exceed funding and staffing resources. The ti...
F2
Redwood Coast Senior Center is governed by a board of directors currently composed of six (6) members. Three members constitute a quorum. The bylaws state that the board shall consist of a minimum of five and a maximum of nine members. The board is self-selecting. Candidates are nominated by the board and approved by a quorum of the board. The Board receives no formal training.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
f 2 Approved 4_21_09 GRAND JURY REPORT RESPONSE FORM PAGE TWO The following Recommendation(s) require further analysis, and attached as required, is an explanation and the scope and parameters of the planned analysis, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared, discussed and approved by the officer and/or director of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed: (This time frame shall not exceed six (6) months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury Report) 4 and 13 The following Recommendations will NOT be implemented because they are not warranted and/or are not dee...
R3
board minutes reflect all actions by the board, including those recommended for adoption by the executive committee, that any complaints or commendations be read into the minutes, and that all minutes be reviewed for corrections, approved and posted, in a timely manner, together with the agendas for upcoming meetings. (Findings 4-5, 10, 24, 26, 29, 58, 71 and 83)
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
r 3rd quarter joint meeting. Recommendation No. 12 The activities listed in the recommendation are the issues that would normally be discussed at the planned quarterly joint meetings as they arise. However, it is to be noted that City and District staff and the District Board and City Council must agree that the issues get agendized for discussion. 5 Recommendation No. 17 As previously reported, the District Board and the City Council have agreed to conduct quarterly joint meetings to discuss issues affecting both agencies. It appears reasonable and prudent to discuss planning and budget revie...
F4
Minutes indicate that these bylaws were amended in September of 2008 to permit two members of the Executive Committee to transact business with the full authority of the board. The only restriction is that the Executive Committee is required to report to the full board on all actions taken. Ratification by the full board is not required.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Finding 4 The Finding states that the District negotiated with the City to provide various services one of which being the “Operation and maintenance of its (District) sewer collection system in accordance …”. This service is to include maintenance of the District’s trunk sewer. The agreement clearly states that the title, management and control of the sewer plant remains with the City and that the “City agrees to service and maintain the trunk 1 lines”. The agreement does not specifically address title and control of the trunk sewer but because the District constructed and paid for the trunk ...
F26
The Center board provided the Grand Jury with copies of written complaints it received about the Center in 2006 and 2008. The departure of key staff members in each of those years appears to have prompted a flurry of complaints about leadership and management issues. Written complaints state that: • “The director is seldom seen.” • “Repeated requests for copies of bylaws or procedures have been refused.” • “Employees say they are afraid to speak up.” • “No criticism, no matter how constructive, ...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Finding 26 The Finding states that the “District has sought increasingly detailed information from the City.” The Finding does not state if the detailed information so requested is information the City should have in order to properly carry out its duties and obligations pursuant to the requirements of the 1995 Participation Agreement. The District Manager believes the information the Board has requested is information that that should be provided or available to it pursuant to the Agreement.
F27
City staff members have acknowledged past shortfalls in providing information to the District and are considering a new accounting system that might improve responsiveness. Some argue that the City is not sufficiently staffed to provide all the information that the District may desire and that more detailed accounting would not be cost-effective in terms of ratepayer benefits.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Finding 27 The Finding states in part that “Some argue that the City is not sufficiently staffed to provide all information that the District may desire and that more detailed accounting would not be cost effective in terms of ratepayer benefits”. The District Manager does not agree with this finding. The inability of City staff to track labor hours spent by crews and administration staff that are assigned to and shared by to two distinct Enterprise Funds (Water and Sewer) is a function of inadequate accounting software. The detailed accounting is necessary to determine the expenses that shoul...
F31
Also in March 2009, the Executive Director provided Jurors with a copy of the August 2008 board minutes that were not included in response to the initial document request. These newly provided minutes indicate the board’s approval of the law school tuition payments that he had been receiving, ostensibly with executive committee approval, since 2007.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding 31 The Finding states in part that “This practice has been publicly criticized”. It is not clear if the District’s separate audit process has been criticized or if not having a separate audit has been criticized. The District Manager does not agree or disagree with this part of the Finding.
F32
Of the three board members who were interviewed in fall of 2008, one acknowledged that tuition was being paid. The other two, including the President and the Treasurer, stated that they had no knowledge that tuition was being paid. The fourth, a new board member interviewed in 2009, stated that he learned of the tuition when it was discussed “…at a recent board meeting.”
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Finding 32 The Finding states in part “the auditors reported that because the City did not allocate costs between the District and City, available data were inadequate to support an independent audit report for the District”. The Finding does not make reference to the unavailability of financial records that were the result of records destruction in accordance with the City’s Record Retention Policy.
F47
The District and City have not engaged in adequate joint long-range planning. They have been largely reactive in actions taken regarding major maintenance and capital improvements, new sewer services, project planning and annexations.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Finding 47 2 The Finding states “the District and City have not engaged in adequate joint long range planning. They have been largely reactive in actions taken regarding major maintenance and capital improvements, new sewer services, project planning and annexation”. This Finding does not take into consideration the dependency the District had and still has on the City. Until the assignment of a County Deputy Executive Officer to assist the District Board and until the hiring of its District Manager, the District Board was totally dependent on City staff for long range planning. The District c...
▶
Mayor of the City of Ukiah
May 21, 2009
•
10 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Response by the Ukiah City Council
May 18, 2009
•
4 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Response by the Ukiah City Manager
May 18, 2009
•
4 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Ukiah City Manager
May 21, 2009
•
10 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Ukiah Unified School District Superintendent
May 12, 2009
•
9 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
* This report's PDF did not contain easily extractable text and required Optical Character Recognition (OCR) for analysis. There may be minor errors in the extracted findings and recommendations due to OCR limitations with scanned documents.